<\/p>\n
Mark Landsbaum: Global warming and corruption of science<\/strong><\/p>\n By MARK LANDSBAUM<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0\/ Register columnist<\/p>\n The Church of Global Warming is well-established in government.<\/p>\n \u201cGlobal Warming has become a religion,\u201d says Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT\u2019s Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology. \u201cA surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning to their lives is the belief that they are saving the planet by paying attention to their carbon footprint.\u201d<\/p>\n The well-established religion of global warming demands converts, insists on hefty tithing and virtually excommunicates unbelievers. These are serious problems when combined with the government\u2019s power to coerce. You can run, but you can\u2019t hide, from the Church of Global Warming\u2019s enforcers.<\/p>\n Another problem is that science is corrupted by circumventing the scientific method and demonizing dissent. The faddish denomination Church of Global Warming recently was reborn as the Church of Climate Change. The original name became too difficult for even true believers to utter without embarrassment since global warming has been undetectable for 17 years.<\/p>\n C.S. Lewis, author of \u201cNarnia\u201d and Christian-themed books, noted the corruption of science nearly 70 years ago.<\/p>\n \u201cLewis pointed out that, in the modern world, people will believe almost anything if it\u2019s dressed up in the name of science,\u201d says Dr. John West, associate director at the Center for Science and Culture and editor of \u201cThe Magician\u2019s Twin,\u201d a collection of Lewis\u2019 essays (and a film) on corruption of science. Lewis\u2019 book, \u201cThe Hideous Strength,\u201d explored twisting of science to advance horrors such as sterilization of the \u201cunfit\u201d and selective breeding.<\/p>\n Science, done properly, helps understand reality. But even then, science doesn\u2019t tell us what should be done once we understand. Contemporary pressure groups largely have co-opted science to advance political agendas, foremost among them today, climate change.<\/p>\n Where once scientific findings were offered for debate, the contemporary model dictates findings and demands its advice be followed. Be wary when someone says, \u201cScience says we must.\u201d<\/p>\n Real science doesn\u2019t do that. Science split the atom. Science didn\u2019t dictate dropping the bomb.<\/p>\n With Congress soon to reconvene, and President Barack Obama likely soon to turn his attention from Syria to domestic issues, beware of policies supposedly mandated by scientific \u201cconsensus.\u201d Any honest scientist should be able \u2013 and willing \u2013 to point to any number of \u201cconsensus\u201d beliefs later proven to be poppycock.<\/p>\n Beware when scientists insist that debate must end because the science is settled. They should be saying, \u201cHere\u2019s what our research shows. Test it to see if it\u2019s true.\u201d<\/p>\n Corruption of the scientific process has spread to highest levels. In 2010, the United States National Academy of Sciences dropped all pretense and revealed itself to be a shameless advocacy group, urging the government \u201cto take drastic action to raise the cost of using coal and oil to slow global warming,\u201d the New York Times reported.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not an opinion,\u201d said a NAS chairman, \u201cit\u2019s what the science tells you.\u201d In other words, drop that bomb.<\/p>\n Some advocating such diktats may recall President Dwight D. Eisenhower\u2019s warning about the growing power of the military-industrial complex. They should re-read his 1961 farewell address. He also warned of, \u201cThe prospect of domination of the nation\u2019s scholars by federal employment, project allocations and the power of money,\u201d something he said is \u201cgravely to be regarded.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201c[P]ublic policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite,\u201d were Eisenhower\u2019s prescient words.<\/p>\n All of this would be disturbing enough, if scientists were getting things right. But because of the motive of \u201cproject allocations and the power of money,\u201d so-called science no longer can be trusted.<\/p>\n A recent paper made headlines in claiming a 97 percent \u201cconsensus\u201d in scientific studies on global warming. But the Global Warming Policy Foundation\u2019s Andrew Montford\u2019s review of the survey\u2019s methods showed the alleged consensus \u201cis so broad that it incorporates the views of most prominent climate skeptics.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe consensus as described by the survey is virtually meaningless and tells us nothing about the current state of scientific opinion beyond the trivial observation that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that human activities have warmed the planet to some unspecified extent,\u201d Montford said.<\/p>\n Bjorn Lomborg, author of \u201cCool it \u2013 The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming,\u201d says the 97 percent finding got just about everything wrong. Of 12,000 papers surveyed from the past 25 years, only 1.6 percent explicitly endorsed global warming with numbers. \u201c[N]obody said anything about dangerous global warming; this meme simply got attached afterwards (by Obama and many others),\u201d said Lomborg.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s some news real scientists should welcome. An article in Nature Climate Change compared actual temperatures over the past 20 years to 37 of the climate models used to project future temperature increase. Real temperatures rose at half the rate claimed by global warming priests.<\/p>\n True science says, \u201cTest our conclusions.\u201d Don\u2019t expect global warming believers to welcome such a real-world test.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Mark Landsbaum: Global warming and corruption of science By MARK LANDSBAUM\u00a0\/ Register columnist The Church of Global Warming is well-established in government. \u201cGlobal Warming has become a religion,\u201d says Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT\u2019s Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology. \u201cA surprisingly large number of people seem to have concluded that all that gives meaning … Continue reading Global warming and corruption of science by Mark Landsbaum<\/span>